Redefining Information Requirements for Crisis Response

Developing information requirements for crisis response is a tedious and flawed process filled with many uncertainties about the situation and the response. While we can take an honest stab at knowing what different responders need, when, and how, our unilateral focus on needed information stymies the best of intentions: historical learning is only as good as a similar future, which is rarely the case; and visioning workshops are only as good as the ability to identify the uncertainties that lie ahead, a very difficult task with severe consequences if something is missed. 

While decisions can be made without needed information based on expertise and experience, this is far from ideal in a complex adaptive system such as crisis response (another important topic, but no room in this post!). Every move one makes (small or large) can have significant positive and/or negative impacts on system performance, not to mention possible interaction effects of different decisions and actions. Information is therefore a lifeline for decision makers when evaluating the consequences of different decisions and actions. Information provides important cues that help decision makers develop accurate representations of the system and the situation in order to better leverage their expertise and experience.

In more certain work environments with repeatable tasks, decisions, and problems (e.g., manufacturing), information requirements can be refined through thorough investigation and iterative development. But crisis response is far more uncertain about the tasks, decisions, and problems that will be encountered. Planning activities can help, but they will never be 100% ready. Unanticipated situations will always be encountered for which one must react in the moment. Additionally, information are often not created and available until a crisis occurs, so it is hard to plan for its use.  

We need a dedicated strategy and approach to information management (collection, processing, and sharing of data/information) that balances flexibility with standardization and that extends beyond technical interoperability (similar to our response management paradigms). People, policies, programs, processes, and products all need to align to inform and improve the handling of the known-knowns (e.g., will set up a point of distribution), the known-unknowns (e.g., how public will react), and the unknown-unknowns (e.g. unforeseen circumstances) encountered during a crisis response. 

This is not an easy endeavor and requires radically different thinking that embraces the uncertainty associated with crisis response. We are doing ourselves a disservice if we focus on predictable information needs in an environment where the most valuable information is unpredictable! 

Tackling this issue will likely take the better part of my career, but it is important to start somewhere. As you consider your information requirements, I suggest you consider the following information requirement types:

Type A - Clearly Needed Information

First, it is important to outline the information that is clearly known to be needed. Bite off the top layer of information needed by each role. These are the absolutes that you know the role(s) need to have. Be judicious, though, as your information management plan will most definitely provide you with ALL this information and you don't want to overload responders. 

Type B - Likely Helpful Information

Second, consider what information should not be delivered, but rather immediately available to responders if they decide they need it. This is information one could presume might be needed, but is hard to define when, where and how it will be useful. This information should be made available and easily accessible to responders without distracting or overloading them.

Type C - Supporting Information Sources

Lastly, because it is unlikely that you will have envisioned all possible information needs, consider how your responders can access different sources of information that will allow them to find the information they need on the spot. This is hard as you need to build relationships and technical integrations ahead of time to execute well.  

There are two things to notice about my suggested information requirement types. First, I call them types rather than levels. This is because the relationship between them is dimensional, not linear or hierarchical. Type C information can be just as important as Type A information. Second, they assume a "role-based" perspective on information requirements gathering. Collecting information requirements at an organizational level obfuscates the information needs of individual responders who are the true consumers of information. Plus, if you know the role-based information needs of individual responders, you can more easily discern the organization's overall information needs through aggregation and comparison of all the information required in each role. This then sets you up to develop an information system that meets organizational needs through knowledge of individual responders' information needs.   

I hope this helps you expand your understanding of requirements gathering and rethink what is "needed" in light of the many uncertainties that crises bring. The goal here is to intentionally and strategically approach information management such that you are giving your responders the best possible chance of obtaining available information they need, when and how they need it. I don't address the timing aspects and delivery methods of information needs here, but they are indeed also very important (perhaps another blog post!). 

I look forward to your comments!

3 Types of Social Engagement for Disasters

Social media is becoming ingrained within the daily operations of disaster management.  From mitigation through recovery, emergency management agencies are implementing social media strategies.  But with limited precedent and understanding for their effectiveness, change is hard. Operationally speaking, how do organizations begin tackling their social media strategy?  What tools are being used?  Who is assigned the responsibility?  And for what specific area?  What procedures/policies/processes are being used to support disaster social media?

We know the many social tools that are out there...Twitter, Facebook, LinkedIn, MySpace, etc.  The tools, though, don't not necessarily help us achieve our fundamental objective of preparing our communities through effective engagement.  This is where strategy comes in and the different types of social media strategies.

3 TYPES OF SOCIAL ENGAGEMENT

Whether you as the Disaster Manager, Public Information Officer, or Intern is at the helm for your organization's social media, it is important to develop your strategy around 3 types of engagement that span all phases of disaster management.

1)  Messaging. Probably the most common and time-honored type of communication strategy for disaster management organizations, social media has added tools that enable use to do this more effectively.  Press releases, preparedness tips, and incident information can easily be passed through Facebook's and Twitter's status updates.

Public Information Officers (in general) develop dissemination strategies through  use of Facebook  (using Facebook Pages) or Twitter by increasing the number of follwers.  There are also aggregation tools such as HootSuite and TweetDeck (check out 7 Social Media Aggregation Tools to Simplify Your Streams for more tools) that help you manage messaging dissemination.  Analytics can also be incorporated through the use of URL Shortners such as bit.ly or Ow.ly.  Better yet, show your influence to your bosses and naysayers with Klout, the standard for measuring social influence.

2)  Conversation. Probably more difficult, but certainly the next step in disaster social media strategy, conversing with our public is becoming expected and certainly a gray area between messaging and data collection.  If the public sends tweets asking questions, they want answers.  Conversation is much more expansive than public messaging because it includes going to where the conversation is taking place.  These days, more and more conversation is taking place on LinkedIn and niche sites in addition to Facebook and Twitter.  It is unrealistic to believe that conversation will only happen on your website.

Conversation, though, can easily eat up manpower and is a risky public media strategy as you develop proper responses to often heated questions and discussions (check out the NYC Social Media Customer Use Policy and the NYC Social Media Policy).  But it is one well worth the effort as your community begins to recognize that you are not just listening, but engaging and working on the things that they so desperately need.  They need to know not only what you have done, but what you are working on!  Begin looking where the conversations are taking place and start engaging now, before the disaster.  Create a list of all online places where YOUR communities are engaging and where your organization should have a presence.

3)  Data Collection and Management. I will be honest, we aren't here yet, but we are heading in this direction.  It is a simple fact, the public is everywhere else that we are not.  They are assets in helping us identify and manage unmet need, and in maintaining good situational awareness.  But they don't necessarily know what our data reporting needs are and they certainly don't know the best place to feed this information to.  But what if we identified existing (or perhaps created) tools that are easy for the public to use and will enable us to do our jobs better?  What if we created the processes behind the tools to help manage the flow of information so that public information becomes more meaningful?

Adam Crowe, CEM presented on this future in his conference presentation Going Beyond Facebook & Twitter.  He discussed the use of social geo-location tools to ultimately aid:

• Search & Rescue
• Debris Management
• Damage Assessment
• Spotter Deployment
• Field Accountability

Tools like Facebook Places, Foursquare, and Google Latitude are just a smattering of examples.  Many new mobile location-based applications are being developed and it is up to us to develop the processes and procedures behind the next generation of applications to meet our information needs from the public.  Technology today makes this possible and is a lot simpler than you think with do it yourself tools like SwebApps and AppMakr.

CONCLUSION

Your followers are your community members as well as those in the surrounding areas.  Prominent organizations and other response partners in your community are also  followers that have the ability to amplify your messages farther than you can imagine.  Check to see if your local non-profits or response partners maintain an online social presence and incorporate them into your social media strategy.

What does your social media strategy look like?  How is it organized?  Who is responsible?